Estimation of generalized linear latent variable models

Summary.  Generalized linear latent variable models (GLLVMs), as defined by Bartholomew and Knott, enable modelling of relationships between manifest and latent variables. They extend structural equation modelling techniques, which are powerful tools in the social sciences. However, because of the complexity of the log-likelihood function of a GLLVM, an approximation such as numerical integration must be used for inference. This can limit drastically the number of variables in the model and can lead to biased estimators. We propose a new estimator for the parameters of a GLLVM, based on a Laplace approximation to the likelihood function and which can be computed even for models with a large number of variables. The new estimator can be viewed as an M -estimator, leading to readily available asymptotic properties and correct inference. A simulation study shows its excellent finite sample properties, in particular when compared with a well-established approach such as LISREL. A real data example on the measurement of wealth for the computation of multidimensional inequality is analysed to highlight the importance of the methodology.     

现代国家、公民教育与宗教

现代国家实施公民教育,努力避免某一宗教活动侵入学校教育的公共领域并获得优势;现代民主国家实行政教分离,在各宗教中保持中立的法律原则;在公共教育领域,国家保障公民人格教育的普遍一致.同时,现代国家承认各宗教的宗教教育及其教义具有正当性并给予合理支持;国家为宗教积极参与社会公众的事业提供必要的法律指导,宗教也积极适应现代社会,成为社会公益事业的一部分.     

The dilemma of recognition: Administrative categories and cultural diversity

Governments around the world combat inequality by means of group-specific redistribution. Some pursue redistribution that benefits groups, but also wish to avoid accentuating or even recognizing group distinctions. This poses a dilemma that they try to resolve by adjusting the category system used to target redistribution. There are three types of adjustment: accommodation (the multicultural approach), denial (the ideal-typical liberal solution), and replacement (a compromise). In replacement the targets of redistributive policies are constructed to avoid accentuation or recognition of inconvenient group distinctions, but still allow redistribution that benefits these groups. Replacement is increasingly in demand around the world because the disadvantages of multiculturalism are becoming apparent while denial is hard to sustain in the face of group inequality. The actual effect of replacement is little researched and less understood, however. Does it resolve the dilemma of recognition? Two examples–India and Nigeria–where replacement has been tried ever since the 1950s cast doubt on its viability.